AtrumX wrote:I'd prefer having each spot getting a different amount of points. I do t know how many times races have still been crazy intense between people racing to get that 1 extra point over finishing last. Maybe like this:

I think I like this system the most of those that have been proposed. The only adjustment I'd offer is those that DNF, get dropped for NAT issues, or for some reason miss a race for reasons like Zak had last tourney should get the 1 point for participation/attempted participation.

AtrumX wrote:I'd prefer having each spot getting a different amount of points. I do t know how many times races have still been crazy intense between people racing to get that 1 extra point over finishing last. Maybe like this:

I think I like this system the most of those that have been proposed. The only adjustment I'd offer is those that DNF, get dropped for NAT issues, or for some reason miss a race for reasons like Zak had last tourney should get the 1 point for participation/attempted participation.

I didn't add that in, but I assumed if people liked the idea it was only fair to have DNF/connection issues tie for last place. or possibly shorten the gap from 8-9 to 1 point so that 16th would get 2, and DNF/connection errors would get 1.

I was looking around for point systems and came across one that has a sliding point system depending upon how many starters there are for a race. The scale would take into account if players drop for a race or two or if someone shows up late to the tourney.

My only suggestions would be to add 2 points to every place so that last place would get 2 points instead of 0. Then we could use the 1 point for participation, which still grants last place one point over the DNF racer(s). Here's the link to the scale:

S7 SockPuppet wrote:As someone who pretty much fights OC to not be last, what is my motivation to race if I place ahead of him and we both get 1 point since we're racing for like 11th or worse place? There's no reason for me to put in time and energy to field a car and try as hard as I can not be able to break the top ten so I get the same number of points per race as someone that just showed up race night and races stock cars.

Most likely I'll continue to race no matter what the point system is, and I think OC probably feels the same, but I think we'd both like to be rewarded with additional points for beating each other. Just because we're not battling for first doesn't mean there isn't a heated race going on at the back of the pack. Let's not punish the kids in the back just because they don't compete for first.

Also, not that I say this would happen, but what's to keep people from racing a little too aggressive for their abilities in an attempt to get into that better scoring top ten? I don't think people would try to intentionally wreck people but I might be more aggressive in turns and try to make moves I shouldn't try because I'm trying to scratch out a 10th place finish.

All in all I think a system that punishes the 11+ place finishers will end up causing problems for everyone. This is just the opinion of someone that will almost always be fighting for the spots that are 11th or worse.

First of all, you're not incapable of a top 10 finish from what I remember. Nor is OC.

Change of Heart-----------------

Well, I'm sat here looking at the systems and running through scenarios based on how many players turn up, point deviation between places, etc. and originally, I disliked Atrum's because of how high the points were getting, however, I now believe that it is probably the best way to correctly reward all positions fairly. My only amendments to it would be at the top end, as currently the deviation between 1st & 2nd, is the same as 2nd & 3rd.

So,

1 - 302 - 25 (-5)3 - 21 (-4)4 - 18 (-3)No change from here onwards.

EDIT - Puppet, if we used that scale there is no need to add +2 to each, just use the scale for NumberOfRacers + 1.

@Epic - same thing, adding to the total or using the next level for number of racers does the same thing, you get the point I was making.

As for making a top 10 finish, the best I think I ever had for a finish was like 5th or 6th, in a field of 8. If we end up with like 12 or more racers, more likely than not I won't be placing inside the top 10. That being said, it looks like we've had a handful of new racers join the pack and I haven't raced against them so I'm not sure how I stack up against them. I'm basing how I'd place on how OC did in the first tourney, because I'm usually right before him or right after him.

I'm not trying to b1tch and moan for a point here or a point there, I'm just trying to use the same logic that you guys at the front of the pack are using. If I beat someone at the back I'd like that to be reflected in the points I get, just like you guys at the front would like. Who knows, maybe I'll have a breakout year and be racing more at the front of the pack and my whining will be unnecessary, but that means if I move to the front that someone will take my place at the back and thus the point is still valid.

UPDATE:I checked my finishes for the 4 tourneys I've raced in and the best I've finished overall was 6th of 9 in the Forza 4 Breakout Tourney (which had only 7 racers for like the first couple of races). While I know that I didn't finish last in every race, my final overall places were as follows:

Now, as I've said before, I think I'll be able to do better on slower classes because they're more forgiving of mistakes and the three Forza 3 tourneys were the first times I officially raced with the clan (which most of you had been doing for like 3 or 4 years) so I was at a disadvantage for knowing the ins and outs of the tracks. Now that I've gotten to play some more I hope I'll fair better, but by my historical performance (especially when everyone was using the same car on new tracks like in the Breakout tourney) shows that I'll be spending most of my time at the back.

Last edited by S7 SockPuppet on Sun Jan 22, 2012 7:33 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Added finishes in four tourneys I've competed in and analasys of those finishes)

AtrumX wrote:I'd prefer having each spot getting a different amount of points. I do t know how many times races have still been crazy intense between people racing to get that 1 extra point over finishing last. Maybe like this:

Well, I'm sat here looking at the systems and running through scenarios based on how many players turn up, point deviation between places, etc. and originally, I disliked Atrum's because of how high the points were getting, however, I now believe that it is probably the best way to correctly reward all positions fairly. My only amendments to it would be at the top end, as currently the deviation between 1st & 2nd, is the same as 2nd & 3rd.

So,

1 - 302 - 25 (-5)3 - 21 (-4)4 - 18 (-3)No change from here onwards.

EDIT - Puppet, if we used that scale there is no need to add +2 to each, just use the scale for NumberOfRacers + 1.

It does make sense to have bigger jumps for the top spots. Sounds like people are liking this type of system. Interseptor, etc any thoughts on it?

Well, this is a tough situation. In my opinion we need to give every body points but I also don't want to get carried away with giving a million points to 1st. I have been reading all of this as it develops and I think Atrum was the closest to getting it right. I also took Epics advise and made this:

The only thing I don't like about this is that there is 29 points between first and last. That is a lot but also hard to get away from when dealing with 16 places. Still, I wanted a lower point option so I came up with this:

Both seem pretty valid. I'm more in favor of 1st place getting 30 points. It makes sense to me to reward top 8 places instead of just the top 3. Let's throw up a poll with those two as options and have a vote/discussion there?

AtrumX wrote:Both seem pretty valid. I'm more in favor of 1st place getting 30 points. It makes sense to me to reward top 8 places instead of just the top 3. Let's throw up a poll with those two as options and have a vote/discussion there?

I am fine with that. We can put up a poll in the next few days and see what people like best. Would everybody be happy with my two choices to choose from? Or should we add another option as well?

_________________"Console A sucks! Console B is way better and never has problems! I don't know how to build a cheap PC that out performs both! Rabble rabble!!"